Talk:Virgin Australia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeVirgin Australia was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 31, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was:  Already done - page moved. Themeparkgc  Talk  00:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Blue → Virgin Australia – Requesting this article be moved under the name Virgin Australia. Virgin Blue have rebranded their operations as of 9am AEST today. Stuartfaz (talk) 23:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Virgin Blue and Virgin Australia are the same airline. Virgin Blue has not ceased operations, it has simply changed names. Virgin Australia still inherits all the history of Virgin Blue, and as such, does not require a new article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartfaz (talk • contribs) 00:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Virgin Australia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC) OK, well, I'm placing this article on hold although at the moment it's a fair way from passing. Most noticably, some references are lacking for things like:[reply]

  • The "Subsidiaries" section;
  • The "In 2007 Virgin Blue" paragraph;
  • The "Live2Air" section;
  • The "Virgin Australia lounge" section;
  • The "Velocity Rewards section;
  • Any current [citation needed] tags.

There are other things that need to be tightened up. Firstly, there is at least one external link in the main text (see WP:EL). The "Controversies" section could do with being in normal prose so it doesn't just list a series of complaints but rather discusses them in a more encyclopedic style. There are also lots of small paragraphs that look a bit messy and unstructured (eg. the "Marketing and sponsorship" section). This may also hide a lack of informative depth, but the Good Article Criteria note that some information may be missing. Image use is good, but the article could do with being more stable (across the hold period would be good enough). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take over the article, since the nominator is an IP user. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 03:18, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you can see the problems Sp33dyphil. Ordinarily, I'd be a bit lax on the hold period if progress was being made on an article this far from being GA quality, but as you'll be aware I could do with it closed for the cup. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 09:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you wanna close it because of the Cup, no worries. I don't think the article is up to scratch anyway. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 10:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You and the IP are entitled to the normal hold period, it's just I can't run it further than that. Might as well leave it there whether or not you want to run with it. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, well, as I suspected the article was too far off to make achieving GA status within a week impractical. I am thus closing this as failed without prejudice to further nominations, should they be suitably judged against the criteria then. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

V Australia[edit]

Please can i have some input here please. Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 02:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

V Australia, Pacific Blue and Virgin Australia are now all one company, therefore only one wiki page is required. I believe that all the information should be transferred onto one this page, and have the other two deleted. Jay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.176.165 (talk) 01:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the three pages should be combined as one as all three airlines now come under the same name Schulzr (talk) 09:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, we should move that page here. Their website clearly shows that the 777-300ER is now under Virgin Australia's name. →εϻαdιν ΤαΙk Ͼδητrιβμτιoης 11:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Boeing 777s are still being operated by a separate entity, Virgin Australia International Airlines - which is one of the reasons why Alan Joyce keeps complaining about the unfair advantages Virgin has over Qantas. The 777s are registered to Virgin Australia International Airlines, not Virgin Australia Airlines; and Virgin Australia International Airlines is the holder of one of the three active Air Operator Certificates of the Virgin group of companies in Australia. In short, it isn't defunct at all. Now all we need is secondary sources.... YSSYguy (talk) 22:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pacific Blue[edit]

I have updated the article to include the 10 New Zealand registered 737-800s. On the NZ CAA aircraft register it clearly says that the 10 738s are registered to "Virgin Australia" and therefore should be accounted for in this article. Access date 2011-12-20 Schulzr (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not according to the NZ CAA Register I jsut looked at they appear to be registered Virgin Australia Airlines (NZ) Limited a seperate new zealand company. Should really stay on its own page but as this page has become a right mess I dont think accuracy matters. MilborneOne (talk) 14:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


There is no page for it to be on. Pacific Blue is no more and the 10 aircraft are now operating under the name "Virgin Australia". The 'NZ' in the name on the register is most likely just a legal necessity. Schulzr (talk) 16:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using the same branding is not the same as the same legal identity, if you were to accept that they were legally the same then why not move all of this to one big Virgin article. (Are Virgin Australia legally allowed to fly foreign NZ aircraft on someone elses AOC in Australia?) MilborneOne (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's got nothing to do with legality, we're just trying to create a concise wikipedia article here. And yes I think the old Pacific Blue article (now named "Virgin Australia International short haul" for some insane reason) should be removed. Schulzr (talk) 16:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are right then the old Pacific Blue article should Not be deleted, it should be put back to Pacific Blue and kept as a historical article. MilborneOne (talk) 16:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to move it back, but I now can't due to the double move by the editor who done those moves. Sb617 (Talk) 22:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's also a good idea, problem is someone has made a hideous mess of both the Pac Blue and V Australia articles Schulzr (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now moved back to Pacific Blue Airlines per this discussion. MilborneOne (talk) 10:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The 10 New Zealand registered 737-800's keep getting removed from the fleet table. There is no other article for these to be accounted for so they really should be included in the totals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schulzr (talk • contribs) 14:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Callsign Changes[edit]

As JetBlast still does not believe it, i'm asking here anyone to provide input or provide a written confirmation to JetBlast that Virgin Australia changed all callsigns, with effect 28/10/2012 00:00Z, to:

  • VOZ | VELOCITY

There are many sources in forums, which he does not accept, but you won't get a media-release for radio callsigns which changed.
The only proof i can provide is a real life ATC-recording: http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ybbn/YBBN-Twr-Oct-28-2012-0730Z.mp3 - This is not a forum, this is a real recording, and the site is well known.
All VBH/VAU/PBY flights operate now as VOZ incl. the new callsign VELOCITY.
--Voz410 (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not evidence they have all been replaced with a single callsign. It is also not proof that the IATA & ICAO codes have been replaced. It isnt good enough. Until we have this evidence that is required on wikipedia please revert your changes --JetBlast (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two examples - Just taken from Flightradar 24

Images to proof:


  • As you can see, VOZ8 is the B773, used to be V-Australia before it was rebranded - They kept operating as VAU | Vee-Oz - Until 00:00Z
  • As you can see, VOZ81 is a ZK- registered Plane, used to be "Pacific Blue" before it was rebranded, they kept operating as PBY | Bluebird - until 00:00Z

Since then it is VOZ | VELOCITY
Happy now?--Voz410 (talk) 20:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still is not a source that confirms that all IATA & ICAO codes and callsigns have changed --JetBlast (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uhm, we've PBY, VAU, and VOZ anyway - For the VBH we need to wait for eg. the Port Moresby Flight - But i'm not going to bean-counting-mode. The Radio calls are available on the mp3 above, PBY, VAU as screenshots above, VOZ should be clear anyway by combining screenshots + liveatc recording (or live feed if you prefer). Let's see if someone sitting in the Head Office can send you, personally, am official letter which confirms what should be clear anyway by now.

Anyone else around, except JetBlast, who can provide input (eg. capturing the POM flight DJ4191/DJ4190)
--Voz410 (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addition: JetBlast, What kind of official source would you accept?

Personal interest: How exactly are all the other Callsigns/Codes verified on Wikipedia?
--Voz410 (talk) 21:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I conducted a bit of WP:OR this morning by listening in on VHF Ground and Tower frequencies while working and can confirm that "Velocity" is being used in Oz at least. If there is an internal memo detailing the change, then I suggest that, for the time being at least, it needs to be cited as the Source for the info presented here; i.e. someone who has a copy of the memo needs to quote its title and its date etc. between a pair of "ref" tags.
On PPrune is refers to "NIC 15/2012" do we know what that is, ICAO 8585 (normally from https://extranet.eurocontrol.int/http://prisme-web.hq.corp.eurocontrol.int/indicators/aircraft_operators_browse.jsp) is the official source and that will change in time but for now the citation needed tag is fine. Also the FAA site http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/CNT/index.htm is also a good source for the same information. MilborneOne (talk) 08:46, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~Cal_t~ Hi there, I have found valid citation for the callsign change. Please insert into article- http://australianaviation.com.au/2012/11/velocity-cleared-for-take-off/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.157.47 (talk) 03:09, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Documents[edit]

Ones made for V Australia

Virgin Australia is actually comprised of 6 different airlines[edit]

As [virginaustralia.com] mentions in their Glossary, at [1], there are six different airlines currently in operation. Searching on [connectonline.asic.gov.au] and [abr.business.gov.au] you can see:

1. Virgin Australia Regional Airlines Pty Ltd (“Virgin Australia Regional Airlines”) Former name(s): SKYWEST AIRLINES (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD, SKYWEST AIRLINES PTY LTD http://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?SearchText=76+008+997+662 https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=008997662 ACN 008997662

2. Virgin Samoa Ltd (“Virgin Samoa”) Former name(s): POLYNESIAN BLUE LIMITED http://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?SearchText=90+116+233+517 https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=116233517 ARBN 116233517

3. Virgin Australia Airlines (NZ) Ltd (“Virgin Australia (NZ)”) Former name(s): PACIFIC BLUE AIRLINES (NZ) LIMITED https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=107549851 ARBN 107549851

4. Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd (“Virgin Australia Airlines”) Former Name(s) VIRGIN BLUE AIRLINES PTY LIMITED, VIRGIN AUSTRALIA (OPERATIONS) PTY LIMITED http://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?SearchText=36+090+670+965 https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=090670965 ACN 090670965

5. Virgin Australia International Airlines Pty Ltd (“Virgin Australia International”) Former name(s): VIRGIN BLUE INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES PTY LTD, VB INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES PTY LTD http://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?SearchText=63+125+580+823 https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=125580823 ACN 125580823

6. Virgin Australia Airlines (SE Asia) Pty Ltd (“Virgin Australia (SE Asia)”) Former name(s): PACIFIC BLUE AIRLINES (AUST) PTY LTD, PACIFIC BLUE AIRLINES PTY LTD, BLUE INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD http://abr.business.gov.au/SearchByAbn.aspx?SearchText=79+097+892+389 https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchType=OrgAndBusNm&searchText=097892389 ACN 097892389

Therefore, there should be separate articles for Virgin Australia International and Virgin Australia Airlines.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority also recognizes them as different entities: [2]

Also, on virginaustralia.com, [3]: This website is owned and operated by Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd ACN 090 670 965 (“Virgin Australia Airlines”) and contains information and material from Virgin Australia Holdings Ltd ACN 100 686 226 , its subsidiaries and other related companies, including Virgin Australia International Airlines Pty Ltd and Virgin Australia Airlines (NZ) Ltd (collectively, “Virgin Australia”).

Well, there are separate articles for most of these. On WP, "Virgin Australia International Airlines" is a redirect to V Australia but is alive and well; with 30 aircraft registered to it, including the Boeing 777s and the former Virgin Australia NZ B73Hs. So that situation needs to be addressed. Virgin Australia NZ no longer has any aircraft, but there are still crew bases in NZ. Virgin Australia SE Asia has no aircraft either - all of its flights are opb Virgin Australia International. Basically Virgin Australia Airlines operates within Australia in conjunction with VA Regional and Virgin Australia International does everything else. CASA has issued three AOCs, to each of those three. Virgin Australia SE Asia doesn't seem to have an AOC, which if it is the case isn't an airline as such. Now, we need to find some decent sources.... YSSYguy (talk) 10:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, Virgin Australia is one of several different airlines under the ownership of Virgin Australia Holdings. YSSYguy (talk) 00:22, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, I think our next move should be to create two separate articles (one per Australian AOC), therefore: Virgin Australia International (30 aircraft) and Virgin Australia Airlines (76 aircraft), since Virgin Australia Regional Airlines (37 aircraft) already exists.[1]
There is no need for two new articles, this article deals with Virgin Australia Airlines, and V Australia just needs to be updated and renamed over the redirect Virgin Australia International Airlines. YSSYguy (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The fleet number of 76 mentioned above includes the 30 aircraft registered to Virgin Australia International. YSSYguy (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Australia Regional Airlines (formerly Skywest Airlines and Skywest Airlines (Australia) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA REGIONAL AIRLINES PTY LTD ACN 008 997 662

Virgin Australia Airlines (formerly Virgin Blue Airlines) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA AIRLINES PTY LTD ACN 090 670 965

Virgin Australia Airlines (SE Asia) (formerly Pacific Blue Airlines (Aust); (currently) not an AOC holder, therefore no article on Wikipedia as an airline) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA AIRLINES (SE ASIA) PTY LTD ACN 097 892 389

Virgin Australia Airlines (NZ) (formerly Pacific Blue Airlines (NZ), registered overseas) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA AIRLINES (NZ) LIMITED ARBN 107 549 851

V Australia (deregistered on 18/12/2014) V AUSTRALIA AIRLINES PTY LTD ACN 109 260 451

Virgin Australia International (formerly Virgin Blue International Airlines) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES PTY LTD ACN 125 580 823

(??? - formerly named VA AIRLINES PTY LTD, Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd) VIRGIN AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 128 423 450 [dereg.] Thakaran 15:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Aircraft register search". Retrieved 18 April 2015.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Virgin Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Virgin Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Virgin Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:22, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet and AOCs[edit]

There are some minor details of about the fleet which is currently not right.

  1. The VOZ B738s (73H) are not all J8Y168 seat map but are a mix of J8Y160 and J8Y168. I know the website says it's either J8Y168 or W8Y168 but that's inaccurate.
  2. Some of the B738s are operated by VA Australia and some are operated by VA International. (eg. VHVBZ is VAA and VHVOR is VAI)
  3. The J8Y160 and J8Y168 are mixed between VAA and VAI
  4. One of the ATRs is a Y70 (forgot which one, can look it up)
  5. The B773 are all now J37 or they will all be in a few weeks.

Examples:

There are four AOCs

  1. VA Australia a/c = https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft-register?f[0]=field_ar_reg_op_name%3A19571
  2. VA International a/c = https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft-register?f[0]=field_ar_reg_op_name%3A101911
  3. VARA a/c = https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft-register?f[0]=field_ar_reg_op_name%3A40491
  4. Tiger

Tiger is now wholly owned subsidiary as of October 2014 (I have added this information).

Currently the ADL-DPS MEL-DPS PER-DPS flights which are branded Tiger are actually operating on the VAI AOC (VAI tech crew with Tiger cabin crew) but marketed entirely by Tiger. By the end of 2016 or start of 2017 the Tiger AOC should be flying them into DPS.

Everything not Tiger is VOZ/Velocity with the exception of maybe the VARA F100s on the west coast.

GermanicusCaesar (talk) 12:14, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The fleet table was edited just today to suggest that there are no aircraft registered to Virgin Australia International; I have just undone that edit. As for the seating configurations, we have to go by what the sources say. I have been aware for years that Virgin Australia International is alive and well, but it is a bit difficult to find any mention of it as a separate entity. The info regarding Tiger ops to Denpasar with Virgin 737s is mentioned in the Tiger article but not here, but that is easily fixed. YSSYguy (talk) 12:36, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know all the sources say they are all 176 seat B738s but if you make a booking and go to select your seat you'll see there are 29 row Y and 30 row Y aircraft! (my own source is that I work for the airline and deal with this stuff everyday when there's an equipment swap from the 176 seat to the 170 seat a/c on a full flight!). Sites like Seat Guru are all wrong (they still think the 777s are J33). The reason that VAI isn't visible much anymore is because the generic Virgin marketing/branding tends to disguise it. It's really only visible in the AOCs and some internal departments. GermanicusCaesar (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Virgin Australia Holdings[edit]

Most of the information on the holding company is already in the airline article, unlike United Continental Holdings, this article basically does not cover anything the other one already covers. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:49, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: The history of the holding company is different to the history of the airline proper, particularily with respect to complex and detailed ownership and financial particulars. Granted there is some crossover (some of which should probably be removed, the 'head office' section should just link to the Holdings article for example rather than be duplicated), but merging the holding company history into this article will make the history section far too long. -- Whats new?(talk) 21:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Virgin Australia Holdings owns the subject of this article, as well as Virgin Australia Regional Airlines, Virgin Australia International Airlines, Virgin Australia New Zealand and Virgin Australia South East Asia. What we have on WP does not really reflect the full complexities of the company structure and it needs to be expanded, not shoehorned into an article about one of its subsidiary companies. YSSYguy (talk) 00:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Compare Qantas Airways Limited, which is a redirect to Qantas, and the subsidiaries are listed in the infobox of the latter, even though the latter is a subsidiary of the former, which is a redirect, this should be the same unless it is substantially expanded. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are mistaken, Qantas is not a subsidiary of Qantas Airways Ltd., the airline is Qantas Airways Ltd.; the Air Operator Certificate is in the name of Qantas Airways Ltd. and the registered operator of the aircraft is Qantas Airways Ltd. The airline known as Qantas is the parent company and all of the other airlines and companies are its subsidiaries. In the case of Virgin Australia, the airline is one among several subsidiary airlines of a parent holding company. The concern is the amount of duplication, the solution is that some of the information should be removed from this article. YSSYguy (talk) 07:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as explained by YSSYguy the holding company is not the same as the airline in this instance. MilborneOne (talk) 08:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Embraer planes (Fleet section)[edit]

There’s a fair bit of info about their acquisition, but they’re no longer used. So some info about why not? However this is sorted out, it needs sorting out. Boscaswell talk 09:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History additions?[edit]

Should update the page to add in recent changes to route network such as removal of some flights to NZ, some in AU, MEL-HKG flights and the addition of BNE-HND flights and MEL-DPS + once partnership with NH actually begins Fork99 (talk) 22:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Voluntary Administration Edits[edit]

I agree that yes it is a rapidly developing event, however I think anything sensational or drastic such as “permanently ceasing operations” or using past tense should not be in the article until if it actually happens because it hasn’t. I think it’s best to leave it as just voluntary admin for now and possibly “temporary”. I believe the current consensus is that it will come out the other end unless proved otherwise if none of the 10 interested parties invest. Currently the airline is still operational with minimal flights, people are still being paid, there are no further redundancies and hopefully as the CEO has said, it will come out the other end in one way or another. Fork99 (talk) 03:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree - I have been reversing various edits, not only here but also in Template:Airlines of Australia and Virgin Australia Regional Airlines, where edits have already treated them as disestablished which is incorrect at this point in time.Fleet Lists (talk) 04:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Virgin is continuing to trade in administration. It will only become defunct after the administrator exhausts all options for sale as a going concern and begins liquidating all the assets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukrapenso (talk • contribs) 05:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In future, if Virgin does actually cease operations, please use this talk section to agree on a consensus, rather than starting a new talk section. Thanks! Fork99 (talk) 02:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I again agree but hopefully any advice of cessation will be so clear that any discussion wont be necessary. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is virgin really a flag carrier?[edit]

From research I have found no corroborating sources for the claim Virgin is a flag carrier of Australia. All the evidence I can find suggests that QANTAS is australia's sole Flag Carrier. And after reading that article it clearly states QANTAS is the Flag Carrier. Threrefore shouldn't it be removed from this page and the flag carriers wikipedia Page?Life200BC (talk) 01:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I believe it should be removed after it has already been removed from Qantas (although later restored) which would be more readily identified as the flag carrier. Fleet Lists (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The term flag carrier is really meaningless these days but it would have never applied to Virgin Australia. MilborneOne (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet list section[edit]

WP:NOTNEWS. Wikipedia guidelines states that primary sources should not be used within articles. The Executive Traveller [executivetraveller.com] is being cited for changes within the fleet list. This news source is mainly based on breaking news stories (such as what Virgin Australia will look like) within the aviation/travel community, so these articles should not be used as references for the time being. These are changes that could be reversed or changed at anytime, so I will revert all edits regarding transfer of aircraft and removal of aircraft until the time is appropriate to add it in. The situation is always evolving. I will keep the 777s being mothballed however, because that is likely to occur, but if it does still contravene the guidelines, feel free to remove it. Fork99 (talk) 06:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there were inconsistencies with even that. The news reference says that various 737s, A330s, ATRs and more are to removed, but there was no mention of the other aircraft changes in the notes section of the table. Fork99 (talk) 06:27, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

VAH & VFF Articles Proposal, Mention of VARA[edit]

The Velocity Frequent Flyer (VFF) article has been badly neglected and as frequent flyer programs are not usually separate articles from the airline itself, it should be merged with this article. I think that it should be mostly scrapped, with a brief section in this article.

Another thing I want to point out. This article is not completely informative because VARA (Virgin Australia Regional Airlines) is barely ever mentioned in this article. You have to dig deep through the article to find it. The reader is completely unaware that VARA even exists if they only read the introduction/infobox, whereas if you read the QF article, you'll find mentions of QantasLink within the infobox (which is easier to find and read) and throughout the article.

I have made an edit which added VARA into the infobox field for subsidiaries in the mean time.

I will also make a proper proposal later on to merge the articles. Or if someone else can, please do so, it would be greatly appreciated! Fork99 (talk) 14:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the VAH proposal as I now agree with a previous consensus from 2017. I've updated the above talk post as no one has seen it yet. Fork99 (talk) 15:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should any 'air safety controversies' be included in "Controversies" or made into a new title..?[edit]

As there have been more than one air safety controversies and some have been protracted...2Safe (talk) 06:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Virgin_Australia&oldid=1207194334"